By Dr Eddie Jackson
Writing in 1982, Kissinger presciently observed that, “Free societies cannot maintain even their domestic cohesion by simply managing the present and hoping for the best. All too frequently a problem evaded is a crisis invited. The future must be shaped or it will impose itself as catastrophe. That remains the key test of democratic statesmanship”.
Since October 7th 2023, Australia has been inviting a crisis and yesterday it was realised on Bondi Beach.
Beneath the level of political rhetoric, condemnation, and a commitment to eradicate such “hate, violence, and terrorism”, the critical question arises as to how?
In the context of political responses to religiously inspired violence, Kissinger further suggested that three conditions are required:
- An active policy;
- The thwarting of designs seeking to establish a regional order by imposing universalist principles through violence;
- The emergence of leaders with a vision for peace.
Arguably, in the current context, challenges exist across all three levels. At the level of policy, the Bondi Beach murders represent an attack on a particular faith: and beyond the Jewish community it extends also to the heart of the “fair go” culture and the multi-cultural policy that has integrated peoples from all around the globe and upon which much of Australia’s recent success has been based.
Within public administration, however, a ‘hear no evil, see no evil’ approach that hopes by ignoring the issue, it will either not matter or in time, go away appears to prevail, accompanied, in times of crisis, with, “We know. We care. But we’re powerless. We didn’t create the problem. The best we can do is manage it”.
That this should be the case is not uncommon.
Government policy typically acknowledges the imperative not only to be fair but also to be seen to be fair to both sides of a contested society. Underpinning this non-partisan endeavour is reliance on “evidence-based’ policy, rooted in objective data and rational analysis that putatively captures the ‘reality’ of inter-communal social disparities. However, experience drawn from Belfast (Northern Ireland) and elsewhere demonstrates that interventions based on such scientific methods not only have failed to transcend the rival sectarian discourses, but have also in some instances inadvertently accentuated them.
Policy prescriptions thus tend to be unconvincing in their grasp of just how intractable the enmities in many ethnically divided cities are. Faith placed in rational deliberation is often misplaced.
The above leads to the second area and the imperative of a whole-of-government approach to prevention. Typically, the lead agencies are expected to be intelligence, military, and policing. Here, at least, the work of ASIO offers some assurance. But international experience points to the need for a conflict-informed lens to be applied to policy areas of education, economic development, community development, planning, and housing – the so-called “contextual necessities’’ that support peace building and preventative approaches to violence to reinforce social cohesion.
It is to Australia’s great credit that that mindset has, until now, not been required. But it is now. Global and religious antagonisms have played out on the streets for the past two years and now, most shockingly, on the iconic setting of Bondi Beach. The naïve innocence of the past is gone. And the reality of terrorism and religious extremism leading to political violence must now be considered. Much can be learned from international conflict experience, governance, and innovative policy in areas including Belfast, Northern Ireland.
And thirdly, the imperative of the emergence of leaders at all levels with a vision for peace. This applies to political, administrative, and civil society levels alike. Places like Northern Ireland benefitted from the emergence of leaders who were prepared to challenge the mythology of their own communities and take risks for peace.
While the political sensitivity involved in opening up the discourse about identity, race and citizenship should not be underestimated, such voices appear to be muted, at best, or entirely absent at worst, in some of the affected communities across Sydney.
Ultimately, Australian politicians, policy-makers, and civil society leaders face a stark choice: allow the fabric of its multi-cultural society too be rent apart by religious extremism, or commit to the development of a framework of policies, programs, and inter-disciplinary practices that will require political commitment and consensus sufficient to support and sustain a long-term endeavour in support of multi-cultural values and the rule of law. First though, they have to recognize they are active agents rather than by-standers.
In contemporary Australia, it must be recognized that no one culture or belief system has total purchase on the complications and horizons of humanity, but that perhaps a positive interaction and mutual enrichment can add value to each tradition for reciprocal benefit.
Dr Eddie Jackson
0400 706 798
edjackson028@gmail.com
Former CEO of the EU sponsored Belfast Local Strategy Partnership mandated to affect Peace and Reconciliation in Belfast following the historic Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement 1998.
If you have a big idea or a story to tell about how you’re contributing kindness in this world, we’d love to read it.
Submit your contribution here.